Business Law and Ethics: Tort, Duty of Care, and Ethical Concerns

This report delves into the realm of business law and ethics, specifically examining the concept of tort and duty of care within the context of a case study involving Extortionate PLC and Samantha's injury. The report begins by defining tort and duty of care, providing a foundational understanding of these legal principles. It then explores different ethical concerns relevant to the banking sector, such as financial record manipulation, customer privacy, customer safety, and informed consent. The core of the report analyzes the doctrine of tort to determine Extortionate PLC's liability for Samantha's injury, concluding that the company is liable due to a breach of the duty of care. The report also considers potential defenses for Extortionate PLC, while ultimately determining the company's weak position. The report concludes that Extortionate PLC is indeed liable for the injury, and it is supported by references to relevant literature.

BUSINESS LAW AND
ETHICS

Table of Contents
INTRODUCTION...........................................................................................................................2
MAIN BODY...................................................................................................................................2
Explanation of Trot and Duty of Care........................................................................................2
Different ethical concern for Banking sector..............................................................................3
Doctrine of tort consider whether Extortionate PLC is liable for Samantha’s injury.................3
Defending point for Extortionate PLC........................................................................................4
CONCLUSION................................................................................................................................5
REFERENCES................................................................................................................................6
1

INTRODUCTION
Trot is a civil wrong which used to cause someone a loss or the harm. This report used to
highlights the case study of “Trot negligence: Extortionate PLC”. This report highlights
explanation of trot and duty of care. After that the report highlights point on which Extortionate
PLC is liable for Samantha’s injury. In the end the report explain different ethical consideration
and point on which Extortionate PLC can defend their case.
MAIN BODY
Explanation of Trot and Duty of Care
Tort is generally define as a civil wrong which used to cause someone a loss or the harm
due to ignorance of responsibility by the other party. Not only that there are many other thing
which are also included in the tort such as infliction of the emotional negligence, financial losses,
injuries and many more. In UK there is a tort law which used to safeguard the different civil
remedies in the context of damages and criminal law (Bermingham, and Brennan,2018). Also,
this law used to punish the individual who is generally involved in such type of the activity in the
nation. Tortfeasor is the name given to the individual who looks to commit any unlawful activity
in the term of Trot Law. There are two type of trot which is governed by the trot that is crimes
and legal injury. Crimes hear not only means any activity related to the cause of the legal, any
negligence is also treated as a crime in the eye of the Trot law. At the same time legal injury
overhear not only restricted to the physical injury, it can be any injury which is related to the
emotion of the individual or the reputation hurt of the individual. Individual who is being
suffering from any of the criminal or legal injury is liable to get remedies over the same (Wright,
2017).
Care of duty is generally define as a legal obligation which is generally applied on
individual who is requiring a standard of reasonable in the care of the act which can harm other
in the organization (Palombo, 2019). Care of the Duty is one of the element which is consider, is
care of duty has been prohibited or not and on the basis of the same different activity are being
planned. As the first thing which has to be prove by the claimant in the court is that Tortfeasor
has not able to follow the duty of the care at the place where incident has been taken place. Duty
of the care must be imposed by the law but at the same time need to be related to some manner.
Duty of the care also used to form as a social contact.
2

Different ethical concern for Banking sector
Banking sector faced many different types of ethical issues which are specifically related
to it. Some of the ethical considerations which are to followed by each banking organization are
as follows:
Non-manipulation of financial record: People of nation deposit their finance and various
important financial documents with bank. So it is the ethical duty of each bank to present a
clear and accurate information to the public regarding their financial records. People of nation
have trust on bank, and it is duty of each banking organization to maintain their trust by not
manipulating any of the financial data of the individual (Simmons, Zillman and Furbish, 2019).
Privacy of customer Information: Bank's are the financial organisation which contains all the
important financial information regarding the public. So it is one of the another importance
ethics which each banking organization should properly follow, which states that each
organizational should maintain a proper level of privacy among organisation. It is bank's duties
to maintain proper level of confidentiality in terms of customer personal information among
organisation to safeguarding the privacy issue of the company.
Safety of the Customer: It is another important ethics which every banking organization
should followed as it is related to providing safety to customers of organisation. It is
responsibility of each banking organization to ensure that any decision or step of organisation
should not create any problem relating to safety of customers. It is core responsibility of banking
sector to protect the safety of customers by ensuring that no harm should be provide to public of
the nation (Buchheit, 2019).
Informed Consent: In long run each financial organisation should followed this
responsibility which indicates that each bank should provide accurate and correct information
regarding the customers accounts to customers. It is bank's responsibility to provide all the
information regarding the customer account and various activities which are taken place in his
account (Goldberg, Sebok, and Zipursky, 2016).
Doctrine of tort consider whether Extortionate PLC is liable for Samantha’s injury
After going through the doctrine of the Tort it has been find out that Extortionate PLC
should be liable to pay the remedies of the injury which has been seen by the Samantha’s injury.
3

As after going through the case study it has been understand that Extortionate PLC has breached
the care of the duty in the organization. This eventually shows that it was the fault of
Extortionate PLC under Trot law, so they are liable to pay the remedies to Samantha. Obligation
of care of duty was find out when it was analysed that carpet which was there in organization
was not in the right condition, this eventually has become one of the reason for Samantha’s fall.
Also, it has been analysed that it was the first time someone has fall from their stress there are
many different cases which has been taken place in the past but Extortionate PLC has overlooked
all the cases, so it is clear that these is the case of trot negligence. So Extortionate PLC should be
liable to pay remedies of the action which has been taken place in the organization. As trot Law
also used to define that any physical injury which used to occur to any of the individual is liable
to get some of the remedy. So it is clearly define that Extortionate PLC is liable to pay the
remedy in regards of the injury (Climent, 2018).
Looking as per the eye of the Law it has been analysed that there are three different
aspect of Tort i.e. Breach of duty, caution and injury. All the three aspect of Tort is met, as
explained in the above paragraph that there is breach of duty in the case of the Samantha’s. Case
study also highlights that there are many individual has also sleep from the stairs, so it means
that the organization has not taken any sort of the caution of the same. As organization has not
taken the caution and for the same reason Samntha’s also has to faced the injury. So it is very
much clear that Extortionate PLC is liable to pay the remedies for the injury which has been seen
by the individual in the market.
Defending point for Extortionate PLC
After going through the above case study, it has been identified that Extortionate PLC is
not having that sort of the point or the statement on the basis of which Extortionate PLC can
defend their case in front of the others (Chamallas, 2019). Only thing on the basis of which
Extortionate PLC can defend the case is by proving that the fall of Samantha’s was not due to
their carpet, it was the usual fall this is the only way through which organization can defend their
case in front of court but this will be not that easy task for Extortionate PLC. Reason behind the
same is identified that Samantha was not the only who has fallen from the stairs there were many
other individual as well who has fallen from the stairs, so it will be difficult to defend the case.
Another point on which Extortionate PLC can defend their case in front of other is by proving
that they used to incorporate all the ethical issue in the organization. After going through the case
4

study it is clearly define that there are no much point on which organization can defend. As case
study clearly shows that there was a breached of legal obligation and also has not taken any of
the caution in the market. So it is very difficult for Extortionate PLC to defend their case in the
market (Hoover and Buzdar, 2017).
CONCLUSION
After going through the above report it has been concluded that Extortionate PLC is liable to
pay the remedies of Samantha’s injury. As case study shows that it is the clear case of
overlooking of care of the duty in the organization. So Extortionate PLC is liable for the injury
which has been caused due to fall from the stairs.
5

REFERENCES
Books and Journal
Bermingham, V. and Brennan, C., 2018. Tort law directions. Oxford University Press.
Wright, J., 2017. Tort law and human rights. Bloomsbury Publishing.
Palombo, D., 2019. The duty of care of the parent company: A comparison between French law,
UK precedents and the Swiss proposals. Business and Human Rights Journal. 4(2).
pp.265-286.
Simmons, J. H., Zillman, D. N. and Furbish, R. H., 2019.Maine Tort Law. LexisNexis.
Goldberg, J. C., Sebok, A. J. and Zipursky, B. C., 2016.Tort Law: Responsibilities and Redress.
Aspen Publishers.
Chamallas, M., 2019. Feminist legal theory and tort law. In Research Handbook on Feminist
Jurisprudence. Edward Elgar Publishing.
Hoover, T. C. and Buzdar, A., 2017. Ethical Considerations in Human Subjects Research:
Emerging Issues in Cancer Research. In Ethical Challenges in Oncology (pp. 145-
157). Academic Press.
Buchheit, L. C., 2019. Ethical considerations in the representation of sovereign clients.
In Research Handbook on Law and Ethics in Banking and Finance. Edward Elgar
Publishing.
Climent, F., 2018. Ethical versus conventional banking: A case study. Sustainability. 10(7).
p.2152.
6